Prevent Don't Promote Marijuana/THC Use

Commercial Recreational Marijuana Opt-Out Action Plan

UPDATE May 13, 2018: It is becoming increasingly important to act quickly if your community wants any measure of local control over commercialized, recreational marijuana establishments. The temptation to ban just retail establishments and to allow cultivation and testing is to be avoided.

If it is believed that the sale of this drug is in not keeping with your prevention goals and in conflict with the character of your community, then it is hypocritical to allow it to be grown and taxed in your community and then exported for sale to your neighbors. The pot lobby is actively promoting and over promising possible tax benefits. Oversupply in Oregon has caused a dramatic price collapse. [“How do you move mountains of unwanted weed?”] Taxes are tied to revenue which is tied to price. As prices collapse, so does your tax revenue. Your costs escalate regardless. Your town is likely to get very little in revenue to offset regulation, inspection and enforcement of these establishments, let alone undo ill effects of increased youth and adult use. Where there is more pot, more kids use. Some revenue is not worth taking.

UPDATE: April 20, 2018–Added links to public service announcement, parental advisory ad, local town opt-out page.

UPDATE: November 16, 2017: Updates include addition of the excellent opt-out language passed by Longmeadow; and a link to a video of testimony to Bridgewater Town Council: “Commercial Marijuana Opt Out | What Every Elected Official Should Consider”

UPDATE: October 31, 2017–Having received an interpretation from Beacon Hill we have updated this post to once again advise that both a General Bylaw and Zoning Bylaw with identical language be voted on by your community’s legislative body. Nowhere in the recreational marijuana law does it explicitly require a Zoning Bylaw as the confirming action of a local legislative body. Therefore a General Bylaw, only requiring a simple majority vote (51%) is believed to be sufficient to confirm a community’s desire to Opt-Out or ban recreational marijuana establishments. Zoning Bylaws require a super majority (2/3 affirmative) vote to pass. It is recommended, out of an abundance of caution, that your community in addition to voting a General Bylaw vote on a Zoning Bylaw (after voting on the General Bylaw). Regardless of the outcome of the vote on the Zoning Bylaw, the General Bylaw is expected to be sufficient to uphold an Opt-Out intention of a community.

UPDATE: October 9, 2017–After the passage of House Bill No. 3818 that became the recreational marijuana law in July 2017, the process for opting out of commercial recreational marijuana activity has changed slightly since Westborough became the first of about 30 communities to do so before this compromise law was signed by Governor Baker. A growing number of more than 100 communities have either Opted-Out or have passed moratoriums on recreational, commercial marijuana establishments citing among their reasons:

It has been the position of this blog to wait and see how things pan out in Colorado before rushing headlong into THC commercialization in other states. Yet rush headlong we did. And now 6-years later we get this alarmingly candid assessment from US District Attorney Troyer of Colorado. Any state or community that is still in a position to prevent the operation of commercial marijuana/THC establishments would do well to read this letter in any forum available and as Attorney Troyer implores, “reclaim our right as citizens to have a say in … health, safety, and environment.”

In 2012 we were told Colorado would lead the nation on a grand experiment in commercialized marijuana. Six years later – with two major industry reports just released and the state legislature and Denver City Council about to consider more expansion measures – it’s a perfect time to pause and assess some results of that experiment.

Where has our breathless sprint into full-scale marijuana commercialization led Colorado?

Well, recent reports from the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area, from Denver Health, from Energy Associates, from the Colorado Department of Revenue and from the City of Denver should be enough to give everyone in this race pause.

There are many many good reasons to refuse to support and promote commercial marijuana/THC in the community.

Do remember however, a “commercial” marijuana establishment Opt Out bylaw does not cover “medicinal” marijuana dispensaries.

The “medicinal” marijuana law which governs “medicinal marijuana treatment centers” (MMTC’s) was passed at the statewide ballot in 2012.

But unless a community passes an Opt Out Bylaw on commercial marijuana establishments, any MMTC in the community with a license before mid-2017 can automatically convert to full commercial cultivation, manufacturing (THC edibles, and concentrates for dabbing and vaping THC) and retail sales.

That is why marijuana companies with an early medipot license in a town are so eager to keep the commercial door open. The industry goal was always commercial marijuana.

The Opt Out on commercial (recreational) marijuana is a very good idea, even if the town already had “medical” marijuana.

There is an honest disagreement in drug policy circles about how best to govern illicit drug availability.

Some think recreational drug use is an inevitable phenomenon, so regulating and requiring testing of the drug is a better policy. A policy of “grudging toleration” of regulated drug use is their position.

Others of us adhere to a “drug use prevention” perspective: where there is increased availability, and decreased perception of harm, problematic drug use goes up. Especially when driven by a profit motive. More unsuspecting “customers” will be harmed by market driven pressures to use drugs.

So, do we want more habituating drug use in the community? Or less?

There are protective community environmental factors which discourage drug use. Introducing more commercial drug outlets degrades those protective community environmental factors by serving to “normalize” drug use, increase the availability of the drug, and create marketing and social pressure to use the drug.

Fundamentally, this is an environmental issue. We worked for a generation to get lead out of our water, air and consumer products in our communities. Because lead is a known neurotoxin with negative effects on the developing brain. Why would we now add more marijuana/THC back into our communities? That also is a neurotoxic substance, is habituating, with known negative effects on the development and functioning of the brain for some people, especially those who use early and often, or those who have a vulnerability or susceptibility to addiction or mental illness.

Under the “precautionary principle” in public policy making, it is wisest to act so as to do the least harm. Less marijuana/THC is a worthy community health goal. Opting Out on commercial marijuana, as is your community’s right under the law, is a worthy local policy.

The marijuana lobby and its spokespersons now are actively blaming communities who refuse to support commercial drug use promotion for the black market in marijuana.

And unfortunately, the Boston Globe, Gatehouse Media and other media outlets are buying in. The Globe’s July 7th, 2018 editorial “Mass. towns need to stop stalling on marijuana rules” is about the uncertainty created for the marijuana industry because of extended moratoriums. But behind that pretense is the new blame game: saying that communities who choose to refuse to support or promote commercial marijuana/THC are responsible for the marijuana black market.

The notion that all communities should increase marijuana/THC availability and sales because some of them are stuck with it is illogical. It’s like saying that because Flint has lead in its water, all communities in Michigan should have lead in their water for the sake of social justice. Both are known neurotoxins to the developing brain. And both hit vulnerable populations hardest. And we need less of both neurotoxins in all of our communities.

If the shaky numbers coming out of UMass Amherst for the “marijuana baseline study” (with a survey response rate of 20ish % — too low to be valid) are anywhere near true, with marijuana use rates at 19%, that number is worrisome and high. Tobacco use rates have been brought down to 11% in Massachusetts. The marijuana commercialization lobby is clearly driving a message that is encouraging more marijuana/THC use. That’s a public health indicator that is moving in precisely the wrong direction.

Remember, the 2016 law specifically provided communities the right to Opt Out. But they made this process complicated, burdensome, and expensive. Opponents of Q4 warned that this new drug sector would target vulnerable communities, as it has in previous marijuana states where 2/3’s of communities who can organize for public health over drug profits never Opt In to marijuana commercialization.

The 8,500 word 2016 law, written by and for the speculative commercial marijuana/THC product industry, is responsible for the current confusion in communities about how to control this industry and drug use promotion in cities and town. There will be no help from the Feds or the state for this new regulatory enforcement burden to cities and towns. That’s why moratoriums are long. Blaming the victim never works out well.

Municipalities should take as long as needed to strictly regulate or Opt Out on this drug as is their right under the law.

What’s the rush for accommodating increased recreational drug supply and sales in the community environment? The pressure is coming from those that would profit handsomely from heavy problem drug use which now comprises 80% of marijuana consumption in the marijuana states.

The marijuana industry lobby is putting on the full court press now. They have opened an online voter registration drive in Massachusetts to push for more marijuana/THC friendly laws and politicians.

We need to double down now on communications via local news outlets and social media presence.

The Globe may be a dying news organization. Like the Denver Post in 2012ish, which opened a section called “The Cannabist”, they are looking for paid sponsored content, and eye balls — which is the currency for advertising revenue.

Please respond and share with your networks. Every voice of reason counts.

We need to work to preserve Citizen’s rights to maintain community norms which discourage drug use and prevent addiction.

Use your voice to discourage drug use at the source and prevent substance use disorders.

We don’t need to shame anyone. We need a voice of reason on addiction prevention, protecting the developing brain, and avoiding addiction-for-profit industrial sectors. We need to find better ways to address problems of social justice and inequities than pushing more drugs into our community environments.

This Gatehouse Media link is full-on advertising and promoting Cannabis/THC as a health product. Free advertising for an aggressive addiction-for-profit commercial sector.

The Mass Marijuana Law prohibits advertising where the audience cannot be proved to be less than 85% 21-years-of-age or older. Gatehouse contols the content of nearly every local and regional paper in Massachusetts and 37 other states. Their outlets are THE local news source for many Massachusetts communities and a primary source for youth sports team and cultural coverage and are broadly distributed in print and digitally. Their Twitter account boasts “10-million hyper-focused readers per week-online, in print, on mobile.”

﻿
If for no other reason, here’s why the movement to promote marijuana use in our communities for big profit needs to end: Health care costs far outweigh any sales tax revenues–a shortfall that we will all have to pay for through our own tax dollars.

Of patients that use marijuana, over 80% of them do not pay their hospital bills. Look at the losses of this one hospital in Colorado alone.

“Conclusion: Subjects seen in the ED had similar diagnoses as those reviewed in the literature, confirming the serious side effects of marijuana use. During the study period, the study hospital incurred a true loss of twenty million dollars in uncollected charges after allowing for contractual obligations. While adverse health effects have been described in the literature, there is little data on the financial impact of marijuana use on the health care system. This study demonstrated an increasing number of patients who are seen in the ED also have used cannabis. These patients are not always able to pay their bills, resulting in a financial loss to the hospital. The authors encourage the collection of hospital financial data for analysis in the states where medicinal (MMJ) and/or recreational marijuana is legal.”

Fact-packed. 1st person, on the ground testimonials from family members, physicians, social servants, law enforcement, environmental officials, business owners, and communities harmed by marijuana/cannabis/THC normalization, legalization, commercialization. This is worth sharing with every local and state policy maker that you know. It’s time to regroup, refocus, and put the lid back on commercial Pot.

The Idaho premiere of Chronic State was a great success. Held at the historic Egyptian theater in downtown Boise, audience members were introduced to Idaho’s new marijuana education campaign “KeepIdaho” (KeepIdaho.org) before watching a powerful one-hour documentary that reveals the true consequences of legalization. This was followed by a panel discussion that included some of the amazing experts who appear in the film: Jo McQuire, Dr. Libby Stuyt, Dr. Brad Roberts, Aubree Adams, and Lynn Riemer.

The event concluded with a standing ovation from most members of the audience.

Chronic State was produced by DrugFree Idaho in partnership with the fantastic documentary film team of Ronn Seidenglanz and Tanya Pavlis (Sidewayz.com). Sidewayz previously produced our amazing youth video called “Natural High.” https://vimeo.com/181200245.

Although Chronic State was produced in Idaho as part of our statewide marijuana education efforts, it is being made available to everyone. After watching it you will find ways that it can benefit your state.

Please forward these resources to everyone you know. If this information is widely shared with legislators, other public officials, community stakeholders, youth, and the general public, it will greatly assist you in your efforts to expose the real consequences of legalization.

A thoroughly referenced wake up call and must-read for anyone who thinks THC consumption is harmless and its legalization and commercialization a good idea. This urgent appeal from an Australian Doctor to the US Surgeon General should shake to the core anyone who still believes that increasing use rates of high-potency, industrially manufactured THC products is acceptable. Where there’s more pot, more people use. At population-level use rates the downstream effects of the accumulation of this chemical in our bodies will likely have significant, lasting and generational implications on public health. Read on below…

US SURGEON GENERAL * Request for a Telephone Appointment with U.S. Surgeon General Adams Regarding EXTREMELY URGENT IMPLICATIONS OF CANNABIS LEGALIZATION FOR TERATOLOGY AND CONGENITAL MALFORMATIONS IN USA

Dear Surgeon General Adams,

I am an Australian Professor of Addiction Medicine and researcher at the University of Western Australia and Edith Cowan University both in Perth, Western Australia.

CVS chose to give up $2 Billion in annual revenue from sale of tobacco products. Because a) it was deemed incompatible with the CVS brand as a wellness company; and b) because it was, in their words, the “right thing to do.”

As cities and towns in Massachusetts consider whether to allow marijuana-related uses in their communities, many are doing the math and deciding it’s not worth it.

The media loves headlines pronouncing the amount of revenue that taxing marijuana commerce may bring into states. But as is often the case with marijuana coverage, rarely do reporters inquire deeply and rarely do they put marijuana revenue into the context of public health, enforcement and societal costs, and seldom do they do the math.

In the business world, any potential revenue stream is weighed against ability to meaningfully contribute to the financial health of the company and against its costs. The same should be true for revenue derived from State and Federal policy.

The possibility of $100 million a year in state tax revenue from commercializing marijuana is getting a lot of press in Massachusetts for example.

$100 million in revenue per year would contribute a mere .002% of the State’s annual ($40.1 Billion) budget. It takes around $110 million PER DAY to run the State. So all the revenue would net Massachusetts less than one day’s operating needs.

Recently John Boehner, and even more recently Elizabeth Warren, repeated a lie that has been used repeatedly by marijuana drug dealers, the pot industry, and as the misguided basis of a “social justice” argument, to trick voters into legalizing and commercializing marijuana.

“When you look at the number of people in our state and federal penitentiaries, who are there for possession of small amounts of cannabis, you begin to really scratch your head. We have literally filled up our jails with people who are nonviolent and frankly do not belong there.” He said in an interview with Bloomberg News – Wednesday, April 11, 2018

For this statement he received 4 Pinocchio’s from the Washington Post!

Four Pinocchios = Whopper!

Elizabeth Warren’s faulty claim about marijuana convictions invoked a further look into the incarceration myth:

“…more people locked up for low-level offenses on marijuana than for all violent crimes in this country. That makes no sense at all.”
— Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), in remarks at the We the People summit, June 13, 2018

Her claims were similarly debunked by the Washington Post. Warren’s position is curious. To base her reputation and so vocal a public position in support of an addition-for-profit-industry by quoting this self-created, self-serving myth, is completely unjustifiable-in-fact. Her legacy as a prescient consumer protection advocate is put seriously into doubt.

Many young people are being mistakenly led to believe that commercial marijuana is a solution for routine anxiety. The rebound effect from using this drug often leaves anxiety and depression worse. Many adults are being deceived, by those who would profit from cannabis commercialization, that increasing access to marijuana will stem the opioid crisis.

In their April 12, 2018 op-ed, “Easing access to marijuana is not a way to solve the opioid epidemic,” published on “STAT”, Nicholas Chadi (a pediatrician who specializes in adolescent medicine at Boston Children’s Hospital) and Sharon Levy (director of the Adolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program at Boston Children’s Hospital) make a compelling cautionary case for increasing and easing access to marijuana at a population level through commercialization.

“…There is ample evidence that individuals — especially adolescents — who use marijuana have much higher rates of mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders than their peers. The loss of motivation that we see in so many of our patients who use marijuana, its negative impact on functioning at school or at work, and its likely connection with cognitive decline are other serious and common harms.

Adolescents who use marijuana are also more likely to misuse prescription opioid medications. In our experience, nearly all of our patients with opioid addiction first used marijuana heavily.”

It takes a long time to get to the “Opt-Out” guidance for communities wishing to avoid a new State mandate that they must host commercial marijuana establishments. The guidance initially spends a lot of time detailing all the different ways that marijuana WILL BE produced, sold, and transported through our communities. While the marijuana compromise law of July 2017 is characterized as having added limits and restrictions on local control, this document is further evidence that the industry is dominating this process, placing marijuana-industry interests above the community norms which would discourage drug use.

There are a number of ways that local control needs to be strengthened. The notion that communities cannot restrict medical marijuana companies from converting to recreational commercial operations in place prior to July 2017 is of grave concern. It would enshrine the bait and switch tactics of the marijuana industry into law, tying the hands of people sympathetic to “medicinal” marijuana, but opposed to commercial marijuana. These companies came to towns pleading to help the sick. But now they get to cash in on commercial pot.

This slide presentation includes evidence and data regarding the impacts of lax marijuana policy in states experimenting with legalization, commercialization and industrialization of cannabis. It is a must read, must understand for all parents, concerned citizens, policy makers. Download the .pdf or view it in this post below:

As the share of the population who uses marijuana increases, the number of users who become addicted to the product rises proportionately. Except in the 20th Century, we have much more potent marijuana and THC-laced products. So the new numbers on addiction rates are yet to be collected or fully analyzed.

Marijuana IS NOT “Harmless”

Only the Cannabis Industry, and those deceived by their decades-long tobacco-like campaign of normalization, are saying marijuana is harmless. Those who are studying the effects of regular marijuana use are warning the drug is in fact clearly harmful — not only to those most vulnerable (youth and young adults with still-developing brains) but to regular adult heavy users as well.

Even as those appointed to regulate the marijuana industry in Massachusetts are being bombarded by the self-serving narrative of this next addiction-for-profit industry, doctors and scientists are amassing volumes of evidence that regular marijuana use IS harmful.

Here is the testimony of a neuroscientist submitted to the Massachusetts’ Cannabis Control Commission. Lawmakers, voters, regulators, mothers and fathers, as well as would-be and current users, should read the following and its embedded links:

__________

Dear Members of the Cannabis Control Commission,

I am a PhD level neuroscientist, trained analyst in mental health and substance use disorder pathophysiology and therapeutic areas, and parent of three young children; I have been a leader in youth substance abuse prevention efforts in the MetroWest region for the past 7 years.

A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that no amount of marijuana use is safe for children and youth; chronic use during adolescence is associated with long-lasting effects on the brain resulting in increased risk of addiction and negative impacts on mental health (including suicide and psychosis 1,2) and achievement metrics. Marijuana/cannabis is not “harmless”. Commercialization and use of high potency marijuana products, including concentrates and edibles, are of particular concern with respect to increased risk of negative consequences for public health and safety. Legalization of marijuana reduces youth perception of harm and increases access to marijuana by youth. Continue reading Recommendations to the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission from a Neuroscientist

BOSTON — One year ago, the battle over whether marijuana should be legal for adults to use was raging in Massachusetts. Now that it’s settled, the combatants are still engaged in a skirmish over how the legal marijuana market should be structured and regulated in Massachusetts.

The Cannabis Control Commission is in the middle of a series of listening sessions around the state and organizations from both sides of the legalization debate are hoping to pack those sessions to sway the commission’s regulations in their favor.

“We need the prevention community’s voice heard at these meetings,” the Massachusetts Prevention Alliance, which opposed medical marijuana and adult use legalization, wrote to supporters in an email Tuesday. “PLEASE arrange your schedules to attend the remaining four of seven sessions THIS WEEK.”

Jody Hensley, policy adviser for the Prevention Alliance, said the organization wants to make sure community health supersedes interests of the marijuana industry as the CCC writes the rules of the budding industry.

Heavy use and high potency commercialized marijuana are real dangers of pot commercialization. Already this latest addiction for profit industry is proved to follow the others: 80% of sales come from 20% of daily chronic users. And as prices inevitably collapse with over supply, so do the tax revenues leaving insufficient funding for health services, regulation, enforcement and prevention.

This is unprecedented — a side effect of pot commercialization: much more heavy use of a much more potent drug.

This pot market takes on a life of its own. It quickly slips out of control. Agricultural economics and commodity market stampedes.

Our colleague, Jo McGuire, in Denver was recently asked to accompany a group of delegates from other states investigating commercial marijuana legalization on a tour of the Colorado marijuana industry. Here’s her account what they observed:

________

A delegation from out of state came to Denver in late April to see how the Colorado marijuana industry is working. I was asked to help guide the tour and ask questions of the industry leaders.

This was an all-day experience, so I will give you the highlights that stand out to me.

After the delegation heard a bit about my experience and area of expertise in safe & drug free workplaces, we were given a presentation by two officers of the Marijuana Enforcement Division (MED) in Colorado.

They started off the presentation by repeating how utterly impossible it is to regulate marijuana and keep all the rules and know all the enforcement measures they are supposed to follow (these are the people overseeing enforcement for the whole state.) They bragged that they now have 98 people in their office overseeing regulation but later in the day admitted that only 25% of those do on-site inspections statewide (3,000 facilities), the rest are trying to keep up with paperwork.

They cannot get to every site in the state for inspections (again – impossible) so they respond to complaints, spot-check and rely on other community entities to report anything they may find or see. The largest amount of complainants come from other MJ facilities trying to get their competition shut-down.

The greatest violations are:
1. Using pesticides banned in the U.S.
2. Not using the proper inventory tracking system
3. Waste disposal violations
4. Circumventing the required video-monitoring system

They were asked how potency of marijuana is determined and they said, “It is impossible to determine potency.” When challenged – they were adamant that it is not possible.

The slow boil of marijuana legalization is underway. When will we panic? And, will it be too late?

Those of us involved in monitoring the rise of corporate marijuana should understand the value of our disquiet. It is an early warning sign.

The Parable of the Boiled Frog

Over twenty years ago M.I.T. systems thinker, Peter Senge, wrote about the “parable of the boiled frog.” In short: if you place a frog in a shallow pan of boiling water it will immediately try and jump out. But if you place the frog in warm water, and don’t startle him, he will remain there, unbothered. If the temperature of the water rises gradually, the frog will stay put in the pan, until it’s too late and he’s unable to climb out. As ghastly as the image of the boiled frog is, the lesson is clear. We are not unlike the frog. Our ability for sensing threats to survival is geared to immediate and sudden changes, not to slow, creeping, gradual changes.
(The Fifth Discipline: the Art & Practice of the Learning Organization, Peter M. Senge, Doubleday. August 1990)

As we permit legalization and commercialization of marijuana in any form, we move into the business of manufacturing new addicts.

As more marijuana becomes available in the U.S. over the past decade, marijuana use has doubled. And rates of cannabis dependence syndrome (addiction) are climbing as well. This biobehavioral disorder affects three out of every ten Americans who have used marijuana in the past year.

As we permit legalization and commercialization of marijuana in any form, we move into the business of manufacturing new addicts. Marijuana addiction now afflicts 6.8 million Americans. While addiction affects all socioeconomic and racial groups, notable increases in the disorder has occurred markedly among groups who are ages 45 to 64 and individuals who are black or Hispanic, with the lowest incomes, or living in the South.

The Town of Westborough Massachusetts was the first to opt out of commercial marijuana commerce under the Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act passed by a small majority in November 2016. Westborough’s ballot question passed with 80% of the vote of its voters. Its General Bylaw passed at Town Meeting with 87% the vote and its Zoning Bylaw with 88%. Here’s how Westborough did it but it was no easy feat. Here’s why.

WESTBOROUGH, MA – After voting by a slim 6% margin against the November 2016 Massachusetts’ Ballot Question 4 to legalize marijuana (53% v.47%), the Town of Westborough (March 2017) became the first community in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to actively prohibit non-medical marijuana businesses, farms, testing and manufacturing. And, did so decisively at the ballot box (80%) and at Town Meeting
(87% General Bylaw / 88% Zoning Bylaw).

The 60+point margin victory was directly attributed to fact-based voter education and awareness on the risks and implications of today’s high-potency marijuana products, the speculative green-rush of an “addiction-for-profit” marijuana industry and specifically, the onerous underpinnings of Massachusetts Marijuana Law.

When voters become educated on the true nature of the predatory industry behind the MA Marijuana Law, they become very concerned about what this industry might do to the character of their communities. Educate, vote, opt out.

Do we have to vote twice?We encourage you to vote twice. The two voting venues are independent of each other. If you are unable to vote twice, it is absolutely fine to just vote in one of the two voting dates.

Why do we need 2 votes – Town Ballot: Tues, Mar 7 and Town Meeting: Sat, Mar 18-20th?To avoid the state mandate in the new marijuana law that our community host pot shops, we must “opt out.”

To “opt out” of commercial pot sales requires a “vote of the voters” to pass a “bylaw” preventing pot shops. A “vote of the voters” occurs at the ballot box. A “bylaw”, however, must be passed on the Town Meeting floor. To withstand legal challenge, Westborough, under the current law, must do both. The Board of Selectman and Town Manager are referring to it as a belt and suspenders approach.

Update April 3, 2017: The Massachusetts Municipal Association continues to advocate for changes to the Massachusetts Marijuana Law that simply and clarify local control options for cities and towns. This is their letter to the Joint Committee on Marijuana.
______________

Under the guise of compassion and civil rights lurks an industry bent on creating a market of lifetime users.

The following is a very poignant letter from an addictions treatment physician to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

As this blog has warned before, today’s marijuana is different and far more potent than that on which this well-intentioned but wildly misjudged push for legalization was conceived.

Hybridized, genetically-modified marijuana is the product of an industry that is cloaking its push for full-blown commercialization of another addictive and harmful product in the guise of compassion and civil rights.

Increased availability and decreased perception of harm drive youth use and lowers the age of initiation to drug use — the goal of an industry working to capture lifetime customers, despite known consequences for physical and mental health. Youth exposures double the risk of addiction.

“Prenatal marijuana exposure does have negative consequences on both the mother and child. This impact should be known so that expectant mothers can make informed choices about how to treat their morning sickness and ultimately care for the future of their children.”

“Marijuana use during pregnancy interrupts fetal brain development. This can result in permanent damage and compromise the development of future cognitive abilities (1). It is the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active ingredient in marijuana, that impacts the growth of the brain and this stage of the brain’s development.

Update 02/04/2017: The New York Times may finally be taking the public health impacts of marijuana commercialization more seriously if their article, “Pregnant Women Turn to Marijuana: Perhaps Harming Infants” is an indication. THC ingestion is among the more insidious downstream effects of the normalization of cannabis use. The percentages of pregnant moms using pot seems smallish, but the numbers have nearly doubled since legalization and commercialization. And that with more potent pot on the market.

The comparison with alcohol still irks. Fetal alcohol syndrome is a more universally understood risk. Don’t drink while pregnant is common advice. These are two completely different chemical exposures. With a beer or a glass of wine the water soluble alcohol is metabolized and excreted from the body in 24 hours. With cannabis, THC not only crosses placenta, but it is fat soluble and persists in the fatty tissues and breast milk for weeks or months–much more health education needed here.

Colorado hospitals have THC-positive babies needing extra care now in there maternity wards nearly every day now.

Colorado is showing us that private pot interests dominate the regulatory and democratic process. And Big Money is how they do it.

….Borghesani [of the campaign to legalize and commercialize marijuana in Massachusetts] said,
“Let’s take the model in Colorado and several other states and put control under state and local authorities, put sales in the hands of legitimate tax-paying businesses and let’s generate revenue for the taxpayers in the Commonwealth.”

But here is what the marijuana industry he advocates for does in Colorado. It stacks the regulatory decision making in favor of drug sales and against the health and well being of the public.
Now, as an estimated 80% of Coloradans want childproof packaging, potency limits, and health warnings like tobacco or any FDA approved drug, Big Marijuana dollars shut down the people’s access to a vote on those regulatory measures. You can expect nothing different here in the Commonwealth. The pot industry wrote the Massachusetts law to stack their Cannabis Advisory Board, which will devise marijuana regulations, with 9 of 15 members required from within the cannabis industry.

Remember, there is no money in NOT selling drugs. That’s why once addiction for profit enterprise takes root politically in a jurisdiction it is incredibly difficult to extricate. Drug money is poured back into the political process to maintain unbridled sales and marketing of their drug. This explains why use rates are highest where marijuana is legal, and use rates are lower where marijuana is not legal.

Some communities and many Town Counsels have been confused by MGL Ch.94G, Sec.3 (b) of the Law–the “pot bar provision”. This provision has nothing to do with the process to Opt Out of commercial marijuana establishment land uses in your community.

Leaders From Every Region Join Growing List of Organizations To Say That Question 4 is Wrong Path For Their Communities

The list of health, business, faith, and local town boards and officials who oppose Question 4 continues to grow weekly. They join a bi-partisan coalition of 120 legislators from every region of the Commonwealth today voiced their opposition to ballot question 4 to legalize the commercial marijuana industry in Massachusetts.

The Wellesley League of Women Voters explores what exactly would be legalized in Massachusetts under Ballot Question 4 including, butane hash oil extraction to produce the marijuana concentrate “shatter”; industrial grow operations; home grow and distribution provision; THC infused edibles and food products; public safety implications and much more.

In this second in a series from WestboroughTV, the issue of marijuana legalization and commercialization for recreational purposes is explored through conversation. In this episode, Colorado business consultant Jo McGuire joins hosts Heidi Heilman and Jody Hensley to shed light on what might be coming to Massachusetts should Ballot Question 4 be approved by the voters this November. Employment and workplace issues, types of marijuana and THC products, youth use data in Colorado, taxes and revenue and implications on youth access and the black market from home growing are discussed. A must see for anyone considering which way to cast their vote in Massachusetts, or in Arizona, Maine, and Nevada where similar industry-written questions are on the ballot.

On Sunday night, October 28th, CBS’ ’60 Minutes’ ran a story, “The Pot Vote,” highlighting public health and safety impacts on Colorado since the legalization of recreational marijuana.

The segment – which features the firsthand experiences and expertise of doctors, law enforcement, and prevention advocates, and CO Governor John Hickenlooper – serves as a cautionary tale to other States considering legalizing recreational marijuana. We can and should heed their warning.

“Dabbing” is freebasing marijuana concentrate–a dangerous new development in marijuana consumption.

In the premier of a new Rocky Mountain PBS investigative series, “Insight”, news anchor John Ferrugia explores what is unknown about the risks of high potency THC for those who “dab” so-called “wax”, “honey”, or “shatter” that can bathe the brain with hundreds of milligrams of the drug. That’s compared to a limit of 10 milligrams per serving of edibles infused with THC.

“Dabbing” is freebasing marijuana. Yes, like freebasing cocaine only using nearly pure THC concentrate that is vaporized with a blow torch and inhaled. The concentrate is nearly 100% pure THC–stripped by distillation of any of the protectant CBD that is also present in plant marijuana. The effect is devastating on the brain, often irreversible, and can lead to severe mental illness and, in this story, death.

Oh, and yes, it is all perfectly legal in States that vote for recreational and medical marijuana ballot questions. Watch and reconsider your vote:

I moved from Colorado a little over two years ago and I have not been back so I wanted to hear from my friends how marijuana legalization is working out. I posted on Facebook: “Through conversations I have found that people in MA have no idea about the unintended/unforeseen consequences of commercialized marijuana. I have not been back to CO since we moved two years ago so I thought it would interesting to hear from you about your experiences and what you would tell voters in states proposing to legalize recreational pot.”

The responses:

“Hate it! Worst thing ever. I want to move and I have lived here all of my life.”

Pueblo, Colorado– The story of Pueblo is a cautionary tale of what happens when local governments try to resolve their financial difficulties with tax revenue from marijuana. This small city with a population of 120,000 is a former steel mill town which fell on hard times. It ranks #2 in the state for poverty.

Seventy percent of the counties in Colorado opted out of Amendment 64, which commercialized and legalized marijuana. The city of Pueblo banned retail marijuana, but the county of Pueblo began to give licenses to marijuana grows and retail stores. Pueblo County commissioners saw marijuana as an opportunity to fill empty factories and create jobs. They made the decision against the wishes of most of the county’s 160,000 residents.

“Fatal crashes involving drivers who recently used marijuana doubled in Washington after the state legalized the drug. Washington was one of the first two states to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, and these findings serve as an eye-opening case study for what other states may experience with road safety after legalizing the drug.”

I was invited to include an unprecedented guest column in my church’s newsletter on this issue and am attaching here:

Dear Friends,

Do you remember the 1990s? In the 1990s, Massachusetts and other states successfully sued the tobacco industry for deceptive practices, including misrepresenting the harmful nature of tobacco products, intentionally attracting children to tobacco products, and targeting African-Americans. Those practices were wrong back then, and they still are today.

Now this fall we are faced with a statewide push to legalize THC, the active compound of marijuana, in ballot Question 4 – but the deception and hunger for profits remains. As someone who has always prioritized the health of children and families in our community – I am a father of three school-aged kids – I am troubled at what I have learned about Question 4 and its implications. The profiteering is immoral, dangerous for our children, and makes worse our current public health opioid crisis. So I hope we can learn and pray about this decision, because I consider the hazards serious:

While the Yes On 4 campaign uses deceitful and confusing TV ads featuring “doctors” to push full-blown, commercialized, retail recreational bud, concentrate, edible THC-infused food and other high-potency marijuana-derived products, our real doctors are urging their colleagues, and all voters, to Vote No on Question 4 in Massachusetts. They join the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts and eight other Massachusetts-based physicians groups on a massive list list of those opposed. In a new booklet distribute to their entire membership, and available here, MMS cites high-potency THC products, low tax rate, lack of public health oversight, lack of revenue earmarked for education, prevention and treatment, limits on local control, and highly problematic personal cultivation, the doctors organization among their reasons for opposition and sum up their position as follows:

“The MMS believes the health of the people of Massachusetts, particularly its children, adolescents, and young adults, is at stake with this ballot question,” says President James Gessner, MD in his cover letter.

While YesOn4 campaign’s TV ads (fact checked as FALSE by WCVB TV) feature “doctors” to confuse voters that this law has something to do with medical marijuana, our state’s hospital and healthcare professionals urge a “No” vote on Question 4 in Massachusetts. In the most recent correspondence to their member hospitals and healthcare professionals, the MHHA points to the latest TV ad (fact checked as TRUE by WCVB). The ad rightly illustrates that this law is about commercial, retail, recreational marijuana with no limits on potency or the number of “establishments” that could grow, sell, process, and manufacture bud, hash, and marijuana infused edibles in our towns and communities “by right”. Continue reading While “YesOn4” Campaign Conflates Q4 with Medical Marijuana, Health and Hospital Professionals Continue to Urge a “NOon4” Vote